Author Topic: Another Intelligence "oopsy"?  (Read 389 times)

Offline Sakai

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1041
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« on: December 09, 2005, 08:40:21 AM »
December 9, 2005
Qaeda-Iraq Link U.S. Cited Is Tied to Coercion Claim
By DOUGLAS JEHL
WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 - The Bush administration based a crucial prewar assertion about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda on detailed statements made by a prisoner while in Egyptian custody who later said he had fabricated them to escape harsh treatment, according to current and former government officials.

The officials said the captive, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, provided his most specific and elaborate accounts about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda only after he was secretly handed over to Egypt by the United States in January 2002, in a process known as rendition.

The new disclosure provides the first public evidence that bad intelligence on Iraq may have resulted partly from the administration's heavy reliance on third countries to carry out interrogations of Qaeda members and others detained as part of American counterterrorism efforts. The Bush administration used Mr. Libi's accounts as the basis for its prewar claims, now discredited, that ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda included training in explosives and chemical weapons.

The fact that Mr. Libi recanted after the American invasion of Iraq and that intelligence based on his remarks was withdrawn by the C.I.A. in March 2004 has been public for more than a year. But American officials had not previously acknowledged either that Mr. Libi made the false statements in foreign custody or that Mr. Libi contended that his statements had been coerced.

A government official said that some intelligence provided by Mr. Libi about Al Qaeda had been accurate, and that Mr. Libi's claims that he had been treated harshly in Egyptian custody had not been corroborated.

A classified Defense Intelligence Agency report issued in February 2002 that expressed skepticism about Mr. Libi's credibility on questions related to Iraq and Al Qaeda was based in part on the knowledge that he was no longer in American custody when he made the detailed statements, and that he might have been subjected to harsh treatment, the officials said. They said the C.I.A.'s decision to withdraw the intelligence based on Mr. Libi's claims had been made because of his later assertions, beginning in January 2004, that he had fabricated them to obtain better treatment from his captors.

At the time of his capture in Pakistan in late 2001, Mr. Libi, a Libyan, was the highest-ranking Qaeda leader in American custody. A Nov. 6 report in The New York Times, citing the Defense Intelligence Agency document, said he had made the assertions about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda involving illicit weapons while in American custody.

Mr. Libi was indeed initially held by the United States military in Afghanistan, and was debriefed there by C.I.A. officers, according to the new account provided by the current and former government officials. But despite his high rank, he was transferred to Egypt for further interrogation in January 2002 because the White House had not yet provided detailed authorization for the C.I.A. to hold him.

While he made some statements about Iraq and Al Qaeda when in American custody, the officials said, it was not until after he was handed over to Egypt that he made the most specific assertions, which were later used by the Bush administration as the foundation for its claims that Iraq trained Qaeda members to use biological and chemical weapons.

Beginning in March 2002, with the capture of a Qaeda operative named Abu Zubaydah, the C.I.A. adopted a practice of maintaining custody itself of the highest-ranking captives, a practice that became the main focus of recent controversy related to detention of suspected terrorists.

The agency currently holds between two and three dozen high-ranking terrorist suspects in secret prisons around the world. Reports that the prisons have included locations in Eastern Europe have stirred intense discomfort on the continent and have dogged Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during her visit there this week.

Mr. Libi was returned to American custody in February 2003, when he was transferred to the American detention center in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, according to the current and former government officials. He withdrew his claims about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda in January 2004, and his current location is not known. A C.I.A. spokesman refused Thursday to comment on Mr. Libi's case. The current and former government officials who agreed to discuss the case were granted anonymity because most details surrounding Mr. Libi's case remain classified.

During his time in Egyptian custody, Mr. Libi was among a group of what American officials have described as about 150 prisoners sent by the United States from one foreign country to another since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks for the purposes of interrogation. American officials including Ms. Rice have defended the practice, saying it draws on language and cultural expertise of American allies, particularly in the Middle East, and provides an important tool for interrogation. They have said that the United States carries out the renditions only after obtaining explicit assurances from the receiving countries that the prisoners will not be tortured.

Nabil Fahmy, the Egyptian ambassador to the United States, said in a telephone interview on Thursday that he had no specific knowledge of Mr. Libi's case. Mr. Fahmy acknowledged that some prisoners had been sent to Egypt by mutual agreement between the United States and Egypt. "We do interrogations based on our understanding of the culture," Mr. Fahmy said. "We're not in the business of torturing anyone."

In statements before the war, and without mentioning him by name, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Colin L. Powell, then the secretary of state, and other officials repeatedly cited the information provided by Mr. Libi as "credible" evidence that Iraq was training Qaeda members in the use of explosives and illicit weapons. Among the first and most prominent assertions was one by Mr. Bush, who said in a major speech in Cincinnati in October 2002 that "we've learned that Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb making and poisons and gases."

The question of why the administration relied so heavily on the statements by Mr. Libi has long been a subject of contention. Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, made public last month unclassified passages from the February 2002 document, which said it was probable that Mr. Libi "was intentionally misleading the debriefers."

The document showed that the Defense Intelligence Agency had identified Mr. Libi as a probable fabricator months before the Bush administration began to use his statements as the foundation for its claims about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda involving illicit weapons.

Mr. Levin has since asked the agency to declassify four other intelligence reports, three of them from February 2002, to see if they also expressed skepticism about Mr. Libi's credibility. On Thursday, a spokesman for Mr. Levin said he could not comment on the circumstances surrounding Mr. Libi's detention because the matter was classified.
"The P-40B does all the work for you . . ."

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2005, 08:47:33 AM »
Why am I picturing a bunch of guys with fingers in thier ears yelling "Lalalalalalalalalalalalalala"?

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2005, 01:55:32 PM »
of course Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi is telling the "truth" now and he was lying then.   of course he is, anyone could see that.


find some more straws to grab at.

Offline Sakai

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1041
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2005, 02:02:14 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
of course Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi is telling the "truth" now and he was lying then.   of course he is, anyone could see that.


find some more straws to grab at.


You know, the US was viciously attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin.

We'd never plant stories in newpapers.

Not here or in Iraq.

This admin never, ever lies.

Hey no, really.

;-)

Sakai
"The P-40B does all the work for you . . ."

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2005, 02:16:12 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Sakai
You know, the US was viciously attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin.

We'd never plant stories in newpapers.

Not here or in Iraq.

This admin never, ever lies.

Hey no, really.

;-)

Sakai


point of order...the "gulf of tonkin" was under LBJ, a democrat.

so there ...yayaya

Offline Skuzzy

  • Support Member
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31462
      • HiTech Creations Home Page
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2005, 02:32:57 PM »
Hehe, pawns of the pawns.  LOL!
Roy "Skuzzy" Neese
support@hitechcreations.com

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2005, 02:58:04 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
point of order...the "gulf of tonkin" was under LBJ, a democrat.

so there ...yayaya


Does it make LBJ a sort of "un-president" of the USA ?

Offline BluKitty

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
      • http://
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2005, 03:03:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
of course Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi is telling the "truth" now and he was lying then.   of course he is, anyone could see that.


find some more straws to grab at.



If you say so.... Fact is he was lying...... Fact is many of us knew this war was being built on lies while it was being 'sold'.  

"I told you so"

Fact is, when you torture people they will say what they think you want to hear to stop the torture.

Does this surprise you?  

Noone expects the Spainish Inqusition.....

Seriously though, How can you think torture is a good idea? Because Bush told you so?  

You know, people who aren't draft dodgers and were actually prisioners of war don't think torture is a good idea...... I think it's a sad sign of the times that people are even seriously discussing such things.

The 'terrorists' are winning...... they(the US goverment) all look scared to me.    In such terror  they are trying torture it seems, all in the name of preemptive safety......

Quote
Why am I picturing a bunch of guys with fingers in thier ears yelling "Lalalalalalalalalalalalalala"?


Because they keep makeing the wrong choices and then refuse to even acknowlege mistakes.... If you don't acknowlege the mistake you won't learn not to make it agin.   But in politics, admitting the emperor has no clothes is a big no-no.

----------------

it's a mess .... but

We told you so.

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2005, 06:44:30 PM »
How dare you un-american commies attack the POTUS! Don't you support the troops?
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17773
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #9 on: December 09, 2005, 06:57:46 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by BluKitty
If you say so.... Fact is he was lying...... Fact is many of us knew this war was being built on lies while it was being 'sold'.  

"I told you so"

Fact is, when you torture people they will say what they think you want to hear to stop the torture.



Fact is if the war was built on lies it was built on lies that the previous administration as well as many Democrats also told.
Thats a fact.

Also I dont remember any link to Al Quada being mentioned as the reason to go to war with Iraq.
I do however remember after 911 this administration saying it couldnt find any credible link to Al Quada

"From the 90s, US officials have constantly voiced concerns about ties between the government of Saddam Hussein and some particular terrorist activities, notably in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which have been confirmed by subsequent reports; on the other hand, the September 11 commission in June, 2004 released a staff report that said it found 'no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States.'"[20]
Wikipidia.com
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17773
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #10 on: December 09, 2005, 07:00:35 PM »
Now here is a much more interesting read then the one this thread was started with

Bush's Deep Reasons for War in Iraq
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline BluKitty

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
      • http://
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2005, 09:05:14 AM »
"Democrats"

Well you can assume I'm a Democrat if you want, they are certainly trying to pull my type (east coast progressives[not to be confused with west coast progressives, or Bull Moose progressives])... trying to pull my type to the democratic party with people like Dean.... but still, an assumption;  Frist time I even considered voting for Demo.  was this last election (Bush is THAT bad IMO).

http://www.newamericancentury.org/
Quote
The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle.



The Neo-Con.'s have long held such views and views that the middle east should be reformed.  Many of 'us' were well aware of this before the Iraq war  and felt that they used 9/11 to trick the less informed into a war they wished for, not on the grounds of some WMD safety, or terrorist connection, but over American control of Oil and world economics into the next century.



http://rightweb.irc-online.org/org/pnac.php
Quote
Founded in '97[...] Signatories to its statement of principles included future Bush administration officials Elliott Abrams, Dick Cheney, Paula Dobriansky, I. Lewis Libby, Peter Rodman, Donald Rumsfeld, Zalmay Khalilzad, and Paul Wolfowitz. Other signatories included Gary Bauer, William Bennett, Jeb Bush, Midge Decter, Frank Gaffney, Norman Podhoretz, Steve Forbes, Eliot Cohen, Fred Ikle, and Dan Quayle.


Dan Quayle sure doesn't make the list look any better ((rollseyes))

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Another Intelligence "oopsy"?
« Reply #12 on: December 10, 2005, 09:42:36 AM »
yep.... LBJ was probly the worst president ever.  right up there with FDR.

lazs